Two of the 33-year-old's friends gave evidence at the court in Oslo in which they described the right-wing extremist as obsessed with how he looked. Four friends were due to testify in the trial today and a statement from Breivik's mother, Wenche Behring, will also be read out.

One of the friends said he thought Breivik was depressed or was a closet homosexual after he moved back in with his mum in 2006, Dagbladet newspaper reported.

The witness said, "I think they had a more friendly relationship than a mother and son normally have."

The court also heard Breivik had nose surgery so he could have a more "Aryan" nose. Breivik claimed he had the surgery because he was attacked by a Pakistani man, but the former friends said they could not recall the attack. He also used powder on his face.

Comments

My gaydar bounced a little when I first saw this guy. But then thinking can a gay individual have that match hate in their heart to destroy 69+ lives for any reason? I believe within my heart the answer is no.

His friend is homophobic. Does living with your mother make you automatically gay? Is his friend saying he can understand why Breivik killed these people because Breivik was gay and therefore an outsider and a little strange?

so a man is gay because he’s concerned about his looks, or gets cosmetic surgery, but a man who has sex with other men…solicits sex in oh say men’s bathroom stalls at airports, or just likes getting blow jobs or…he’s NOT gay.

The only reason why it’s remotely interesting that he might be a closet case is that Breivik has spoken against gays, adopting the catholic mindset.
Another thing that’s not mentioned in this article is Breivik’s voice. He’s very soft spoken; the first time I heard him speak it was a shock. It didn’t fit his macho evil image.

The narrative being skewed in that testimony make me really wonder about the attitudes in the Norwegian judicial system that would allow such a thing.

What could tangential speculation about the defendant’s alleged (and obviously repressed) sexuality have to do with his guilt or innocence? Are his defense attorneys trying to argue that internalized and inward-directed hatred of homosexuality led to extreme mental illness, and therefore mitigates his legal responsibility? I don’t think that argument will get very far.

I don’t think the point has much to do with gayness in an of itself. It seems like that testimony was to show that he is deeply insecure and antisocial. If he is insecure about his sexuality, that feeds into the narrative of self-hatred that they seem to be trying to build. All in all it doesn’t surprise me that much. Can you really hate others so thoroughly without also hating yourself?

One thing is certain: the closet is a very unhealthy place to live. If Breivik is a closeted gay man it is one more reason to rip the doors off all the closets of the world. Free at last, free at last, thank mother nature, free at last.

There were Nazis who were gay, including top ones, who were gay and even at least part Jewish. Hitler himself may have been gay. There were likewise gay communists who looked the other way when the communists in various countries persecuted gays. Even today, you’ll see gays wearing Che shirts even though he persecuted gays.

I know talking about taboo stuff like this makes people uncomfortable [and some posters will concentrate on twisting the story into an exclusively ‘closeted gays are bad’ angle. But the psychology behind this phenomena goes a lot deeper.

I could see crazy “Alan” that posts here going off and killing a bunch of progressive people. His mind seems so locked into defending religion at all costs that a small snap would turn him into another Anders.